Hedging on Hegemony: The Realist Debate over How to Respond to China

Abstract Regional hegemony is a realist concept explaining how great powers deal with each other and with their immediate surroundings. Realism's competing strands disagree on whether regional hegemony is a feasible objective, and on whether states should actively pursue this goal. For offensive realists, the international system's anarchic structure and the impossibility of gauging others' intentions compel states to maximize relative power and try to become the only great power in their region. They predict that a great power war is more likely because China will try to establish hegemony in Asia and the United States will try to prevent it from doing so. By contrast, defensive realists maintain that bids for hegemony are usually thwarted by powerful balancing coalitions. Defensive realists have the stronger case: In modern times, the United States is the only great power whose bid for hegemony was not thwarted by a powerful balancing coalition. The United States succeeded because conditions in North America were unusually favorable; China does not enjoy similar advantages. A Chinese bid for hegemony in Asia is likely to fail and Beijing would be unwise to attempt it. U.S. leaders can therefore adopt a measured approach to this danger, facilitating balancing behavior by the United States' Asian partners while working with China to create a more stable regional order.